The Official Jimmy Olsen Casting & Discussion Thread

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by Smallville13

Or woman...

Look in the end I don't think anyone will complain if we really like this new character and she ends up being preferable to Jimmy.

I can't imagine I will prefer her to Jimmy.

I actually think his gender is kind of important to why I like the character. If she's a women, the character just seems kind of pointless.

Jimmy serves one very specific role - he's Clark's only male friend in Metropolis. The kind of friend he can go for a beer with, go to a football game with. And Jimmy comes to Clark for advice on women, how to stand up to Perry, or to ask him for favours. It's a big brother/little brother dynamic.

Yes yes, you CAN do all those things with a women. Of course you can. I have tonnes of male friends and i'm a woman. But it's just different. It's a different connection.

A bro needs at least one bro mate!

[Vagosnati]

Originally Posted by hopefuldreamer

I can't imagine I will prefer her to Jimmy.

I actually think his gender is kind of important to why I like the character. If she's a women, the character just seems kind of pointless.

Jimmy serves one very specific role - he's Clark's only male friend in Metropolis. The kind of friend he can go for a beer with, go to a football game with. And Jimmy comes to Clark for advice on women, how to stand up to Perry, or to ask him for favours. It's a big brother/little brother dynamic.

Yes yes, you CAN do all those things with a women. Of course you can. I have tonnes of male friends and i'm a woman. But it's just different. It's a different connection.

A bro needs at least one bro mate!

Not true at all!!!
i love to be surounded by women and only women.young,sexy,and dressed like nurses

[LibidoLoca]

Originally Posted by Vagosnati

Not true at all!!!
i love to be surounded by women and only women.young,sexy,and dressed like nurses

[cronosred]

Originally Posted by Ultimatehero

okay, if you really want PC - make him gay. That's PC and true to some adaptations at least.

I don't think they would even entertain the thought after people freaked out the last time there was just a rumor of Jimmy being gay in the old Abrams script.

[FilmNerdJamie]

I thought it was pretty clear Jimmy was gay in Superman Returns.

[Ultimatehero]

Originally Posted by cronosred

I don't think they would even entertain the thought after people freaked out the last time there was just a rumor of Jimmy being gay in the old Abrams script.

That was back in the 90s. We're now living in an age where most straight guys know at least one LGBT guy. Where show creators who are brought in to make something hip and edgy include a gay character. Or where gay characters are used to have that grounded edge. Basically politically and sociologically it's a brave new world we're living in now as opposed to back then.

Also there would be a lot less jokes from the press about Jimmy being gay. It would be seen as progressive these days especially with gay rights being the hot button issue and "it" thing these days. Reporters however are gonna have a field day and laugh riot about Jimmy's sex-change, especially since he used to cross-dress in the comic books. Having a character who cross-dressed and then in the film making him a woman, yes there is a lot to get out of that.

As said - they could have avoided this whole thing and just used Cat Grant. They didn't name Rachel Dawe's 'Henrietta Dent' and they very well could have.

Also if anyone watches SMALLVILLE, you'd know there was a great difference in the season where Clark only had girls around and no guy friends. I'm pretty sure the show creators even stated that's why they brought Jimmy and Green Arrow into the mix, to level things back out.

[Sub-Zero]

If Burton's version got made jimmy would've been played by Chris rock. I wonder how much uproar that would cause now. No one seemed to care back in the late 90s. Probably bc it was never getting made. As a life long superman fan , I don't care. Silver age jimmy had more of an impact, but modern day jimmy is just Clark's bff, and its not like he does much anyway.

[Kane52630]

Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie

I thought it was pretty clear Jimmy was gay in Superman Returns.

[cronosred]

Originally Posted by Ultimatehero

That was back in the 90s. We're now living in an age where most straight guys know at least one LGBT guy. Where show creators who are brought in to make something hip and edgy include a gay character. Or where gay characters are used to have that grounded edge. Basically politically and sociologically it's a brave new world we're living in now as opposed to back then.

How many gay characters have appeared in comic book movies between the 90's and now? What well known straight characters from the comics were changed gay for the films between now and then?

[Ultimatehero]

I'll answer that with questions of my own:

How many leading white characters in comic book movies were made black before Daredevil?

Also --

What well known guy characters have underwent a sex change for film?

In television at least there are straight characters who are portrayed as straight for years, then when a new show creator comes in they suddenly come out. So that's not a new practice. And that isn't a practice that's met with much backlash. However, turn said character into a woman - you off set everything. Dynamics between guys of any and all sexualities is the same when friends. Dynamics between guys and girls are different from that.

-----------------

As said, if they wanted to be politically correct a gay Jimmy would be a lot more acceptable by folks than Jimmy suddenly becoming a woman which will just seem weird. For girls the politically correct would be a stronger Cat Grant. And by weird I mean like Crying Games level weird. I mean, in a Superman movie having the Chief yell "Olsen!" and seeing a girl run in instead of a guy will be severely distracting.

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by Compi716

This post deserves two thumbs up. There's no good reason to make Jimmy a woman other than to "spice things up" for the sake of being different.

Other posters can spin this any way they'd like, but it really boils down to this: it's a stupid, pointless change. And for those saying that Jimmy isn't an important character to the mythos, so what does matter anyways...this thread clearly shows that he does matter.

I think it boils down to this , as with most changes from Comic to Screen, some people will have an isue with it and some wont.

Either way ,the filmmakers are gonna do what they want to do regardless of whatever specualtion we all have about their motives. We aren't making this film , and we don't have the final say in creative choices Nolan, Goyer, and Snyder may make whether we like it or not.

That said , I can understand why fans may an issue with it . I don't , and i'm not gonna apologize for not being upset about the change. However, I can see why people may be against it. For me the issue would be how the character works in this version of the Superman. At this point we really don't know. We don't even know if the rumor is true or if she even is the new version of Jimmy Olsen.

[Ultimatehero]

The main thing is though "how this character works in this version of Superman" is that there was no need for any connection to Jimmy. They could have more easily modified Cat Grant or used the name Cat Grant or a made up name for this character they want. That's what makes it seem mindless and just change for change sake is that they could have did what they did with Rachel Dawes. The equivalent would be having had her character named 'Henrieta Dent.'

[Lord]

What i see is that adaptations just keep changing characters as they want and in most cases fans have to accept it just because of the excuse that it may be racist or whatever. I don't see any proper excuse here, there are other female reporters in the Daily Planet, why change Jimmy like this when you have some 3 different characters that could fit the bill?

[hopefuldreamer]

Exactly.

I'm all for change if it's for good reason and enhances the story.

But I hate change for the sake of change, especially when it's over the top. And personally I think, If this is true, that's all it is.

[The Guard]

I'd be concerned if this rumor hadn't come from IMDB.

[manofsteel4life]

IMO I think it's someone trying to get WB to leak some details, and WB is waiting to see how bad this rumor gets whether it's true or not to say something.....I wouldn't put much thought into it, me thinks

[Lencho01]

WB wouldn't bother leaking anything because a small group of people are speculating who this relatively insignificant character is.

All people can really take away from it is that Rebecca Buller is playing a character named Jenny Olsen in MOS. Free publicity for her.

[DarkKnight FTW]

Originally Posted by Ultimatehero

I'll answer that with questions of my own:

How many leading white characters in comic book movies were made black before Daredevil?

You mean like Harvey Dent in Batman '89?

Also, you all say that IMDB isn't reliable...yet when they post things you like, you bounce of the walls with enthusiasm. Conversely, when its something you don't like you get pissed. No one has any idea who that woman is playing or what the exact plot points are even if she was playing Jenny. So how can you sit there and say things like its just a change for the sake of change. Do you have the script? Have you seen the movie? For all you know, both Jenny and Jimmy exist in the MOS universe. I know there's not a whole lot of things to talk about but don't lose perspective. Also, before TDKR was released IMDB had Juno Temple playing Holly. She actually played a character named Jen.

[Rowsdower!]

I don't know if the rumor is true or not, but I have to say, she's the best looking Jimmy Olsen I've ever seen.

[BenReilly]

Take it for what it's worth, but CBR got a "No comment", from WB in regards to this:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?p...ticle&id=43315

CBR News spoke with a Warner Bros. executive who offered a "No comment" in response to our questions.

[Lencho01]

"No comment" helps to have people continue talking about it.

[Compi716]

Sigh.

If they needed to make Jimmy a woman, couldn't they at least have found a redheaded actress?

I will say this about Snyder: when he was first announced, I was very excited because I knew that, based on his previous work, we'd get a movie that genuinely looked and felt like a Superman comicbook come to life. Then Cavill was cast, and we took one step closer to that. I just hope that tone is in the final product, and Snyder's stylistic vision hasn't been neutered (he'd go out of his way to make Jimmy a redhead, for example) to fit the "realistic" Nolan world.

[Gianakin_]

Redhead women are unrealistic? I think this IMDb rumor is being taken too far.

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by Ultimatehero

The main thing is though "how this character works in this version of Superman" is that there was no need for any connection to Jimmy. They could have more easily modified Cat Grant or used the name Cat Grant or a made up name for this character they want. That's what makes it seem mindless and just change for change sake is that they could have did what they did with Rachel Dawes. The equivalent would be having had her character named 'Henrieta Dent.'

Again, people seem to miss that this is Zack Synder's version of the Superman story. Not Donner, not Smallville, not the previous versions in the comic books, movies and TV. Sure they could have had Cat Grant instead of Jenny Olsen. They also could have had Lana Lang be the sole love interest instead of Lois, they could have had created a villan for the film, they cold have done alot of things. The point is , that whatever the reason or motivations , if the rumors are true, then Jenny Olsen is what we got. Its their version of the story.

Now I assumed Jimmy Olsen would be in the film , but I also know that the Superman story has been told so many ways that Nolan and co were most likely gonna put their own spin on it in some way and the Fishburne casting hinted to me that alot of assumptions we have about the characters may not pan out. I'm gonna judge the change by how it works in the context of this version of the story. If turns out to be a bust I'll be the first to say it was a bad idea , but I can't complain about a performance or a character that i've yet to see , in a film i have yet to see.

[Ultimatehero]

Thing is, this is the cheap and easy and damning way out. No matter what the character is I'll always hate the character because it will never be necessary or needed when they could have gone the Rachel Dawes route. I also doubt others who don't like it now will change their minds later, some but not most. For the same reason. They could have went by a different name or made up name easily. This is the cheap and easy way out.